sadoldgit

My thoughts exactly. When the news first broke and the picture was published it was just ridiculously absurd. They have blown it up from the world’s worst attempt at surveillance to the most heinous crime in football.

And killing time until we hear from the panel/EFL and have something concrete to discuss.

According the news on LBC, the panel are meeting “this lunchtime” and a decision will be made later about the fate of the final. Seems odd if they have recently released more tickets.

No! My uncle was a compositor there though so his spelling skills DNA clearly didn’t pass over to me. Actually it was The Guardian who had a poor record for typos (hence being called The Gruaniad) and no, I wasn’t a proof reader there either!

Fortunately not, although I did actually do a shift on the Evening Standard as a Reader’s Assistant. I had to read out the text while he read it and corrected any errors. They were wise enough not to let me on the reader’s chair.

I worked for The Times (the fourth generation of my family to do so) just before Murdoch bought it and was very proud to do so as it was held in such high regard. When the takeover was announced the moral on the newspaper went through the floor as they new it was the end.

Murdoch’s gonna Murdoch.

We are not going to be kicked out. So many soiled mattresses on here.

Which is why I don’t think that expulsion was a firm option prior to the hearing, hence Boro doing their level best to make it so.

The game is going ahead. The winners will be promoted. If SFC are found guilty of breaking both sets of rules as charged they will face a proportionate penalty which either SFC or the EFL could appeal against if they feel the punishment does not fit the crime. Sorted.

Equally they could have been trying to apply pressure before a sanction had been agreed. I’m not sure we can draw any conclusion from their statement other than they were trying to play victimhood out in public to get everyone onside with them.

Ah, ok. So the panel has the power to decide whether to use the sanctions to be a “deterrent” for the EFL rather than the EFL themselves?

If there was an agreed plea bargain in place why would the panel sit? I’m not certain but I think that the panel will decide whether the rules have been broken and outline if any mitigating circumstances should be considered and the EFL decide upon the sentence. The sentence will then set a precedent so the EFL need to be in control of that.

You are saying that it has to be big enough to be a deterrent. To actually be big enough to stop it it would need to be disproportionate, like a £500m fine and relegation by two leagues or something. Clearly a driving ban for drink driving is not a deterrent because people are regularly banned for drink driving. There is a saying” the punishment should fit the crime.” As far as I know there is no saying that says, “the deterrent should prevent the crime.” Given the number of cases of rule breaking that goes on, clearly nothing serves as a deterrent.

I’m not sure why you can’t see that any sanction has to be proportionate. If deterrent’s actually worked there would be no offences.

There is a massive difference between “trying” to get an advantage and succeeding in getting an advantage. I’d be very surprised if our pathetic attempt at “trying” would not be taken into account if found guilty. It is all about proportionality.

He says that the club is on trial and will face any sanctions but individual action could be taken against any individual later by the FA. I’m not sure that is true because only EFL rules have (allegedly) been broken.

So the analysts also analyse the analysts? 🕵

The people on the panel are professionals who will look at the case and make a decision based on the evidence. Have you considered the fact that we have been “quite” because we are happy to let the facts speak for themselves? Blimey mate, man up!

Jesus Christ there are some pathetic posts on here. Go back and look at the picture again. This is no professional deep seated spying operation. For God’s sake get some perspective.

Spot on. Today was given as the last day it was expected to happen so it looks like they couldn’t arrange it before. This isn’t the trial of the century, it is a tribunal which will look at submission from both sides and draw a conclusion. This isn’t something that takes days to deliberate over (although we have 😉). They will then make their findings known to the EFL who will then decide upon the punishment if the club is found guilty.

I really don’t know Sheba, but if they go for something crazy they face an appeal which they will probably lose given the circumstances (not only was he only equipped with an iPhone, it seems as though he was a good 200m to 400m from any action, so probably the most inept and ineffectual recon mission ever). Also, if it is true that they are all at it, the EFL won’t want to stir up a hornets nest by imposing some massive, disproportionate penalty. What penalties do the EPL and EFL currently have that are so punitive that the have stopped clubs from transgressing?

It has to be proportionate to the offence.

There are plenty of precedents set that haven’t prevented clubs from breaking the rules. The FA Cup Final was contested by two of them. The penalty has to be proportionate to the offence. The days of people being hung for stealing handkerchiefs are long gone.